Climate change? do you believe it?

andrewkar said:
But you know that creating those things cost money and process of production/utilization isn't that "green" as you think?
Click to expand...

Not arguing with you about that. How green something is, isn't my concern.

Again I see beauty in a vehicle that is powered by an 'engine' with one moving part. A lump of copper wire and some fuckin' magnets. If I can charge this vehicle with a solar panel on my roof then what's not to like there?

Compared to the insane complexity and inefficiency of a combustion engine. Dealing with hundreds of moving parts. You've got shafts, pistons, rods, sparkplugs, timing belts, drive belts, valves, springs, fucking gaskets, seals and all sorts of shit happening. Engine oil, coolant, radiators, pipes with flammable liquids, hot gases. Additional systems to satisfy emission laws... my car has a fucking canister filled with charcoal that absorbs fuel vapours from the tank, it then has to pull a vacuum on the canister to purge the vapours into the engine so it can be burned off at an appropriate time.

A triumph of mechanical engineering, but fuckin' hell there's an easier way!
 


Fatbat said:
Of course the manufacturing process on any electronics isn't "green". But neither is digging coal or oil out of the ground and transporting it, refining it, etc. Once you've burned that fuel, it's gone.

In the long run, the solar panel is going to be a greener option.
Click to expand...
Probably it's gonna be the only (or one of the few new ones) option one day...
Not sure about greener...
 
andrewkar said:
Probably it's gonna be the only option one day...
Click to expand...

lol no, didn't you hear, the scientists were wrong on their peak oil estimates. this obviously means oil will be around forever and we don't need to come up with any alternative sources.
 
icestationzebra said:
Not arguing with you about that. How green something is, isn't my concern.

Again I see beauty in a vehicle that is powered by an 'engine' with one moving part. A lump of copper wire and some fuckin' magnets. If I can charge this vehicle with a solar panel on my roof then what's not to like there?

Compared to the insane complexity and inefficiency of a combustion engine. Dealing with hundreds of moving parts. You've got shafts, pistons, rods, sparkplugs, timing belts, drive belts, valves, springs, fucking gaskets, seals and all sorts of shit happening. Engine oil, coolant, radiators, pipes with flammable liquids, hot gases. Additional systems to satisfy emission laws... my car has a fucking canister filled with charcoal that absorbs fuel vapours from the tank, it then has to pull a vacuum on the canister to purge the vapours into the engine so it can be burned off at an appropriate time.

A triumph of mechanical engineering, but fuckin' hell there's an easier way!
Click to expand...
Sure, agreed. It smells much better. Still, this will not extend our life on this planet I think. Could be good for day to day living, but no major change to our survival. Also, I like gasoline powered engines!
 
Rotalihinna said:
lol no, didn't you hear, the scientists were wrong on their peak oil estimates. this obviously means oil will be around forever and we don't need to come up with any alternative sources.
Click to expand...

Having spent more than few hours with more than a few geologists who specialize in locating hydrocarbon deposits, I can say for certain that "peak oil" means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. I've heard nothing remotely close to a consensus regarding PO, and I've heard it discussed at length by a lot of people working in the field.
 
IceToEskimos said:
Having spent more than few hours with more than a few geologists who specialize in locating hydrocarbon deposits, I can say for certain that "peak oil" means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. I've heard nothing remotely close to a consensus regarding PO, and I've heard it discussed at length by a lot of people working in the field.
Click to expand...
Peak oil.. Isn't that when you're fucking a girl (or guy) in the ass and right as you're about to cum, she (or he) gets explosive diarrhea?
 
jeffrey said:
Peak oil.. Isn't that when you're fucking a girl (or guy) in the ass and right as you're about to cum, she (or he) gets explosive diarrhea?
Click to expand...

Exactly.

In industry parlance, that's referred to as a "gusher" or "blowout", and while it's a great problem to have in a lot of respects (because at least you aren't dealing with a dry hole), it creates big problems as far as the EPA is concerned.

You really need to be on top of "downhole pressure", and from talking to you, I know that you are, so you've got nothing to worry about.
 
The science on climate change is questionable at best. What you should be worried about is the DNA restructuring of foods that we eat that's slowing changing our character as humans.

If you can find newspapers from the 1900s you will find headlines about climate change. Mother earth cannot be damaged, because it has knowledge about how to heal itself. Unfortunately, that might included eliminating must of we humans and start the process all over again with new species.
 
IceToEskimos said:
I find it hilarious that earth-lovers are always suggesting some modification of human behavior in order to extend the length of time we as a species are able to continue raping the planet and reshaping it to fit our needs. You guys are like minarchists, arguing that a "little rape is ok, but too much rape is BAD, so we need strict limits on the amount of rape that we will tolerate".

If you actually cared about the earth, you'd be all for carbon emissions increasing, because ostensibly, that would accelerate the global warming phenomenon and cause the earth to become uninhabitable for humans even faster. I may not be convinced that the recent climate change we've been able to observe accurately has been caused by human activity, or to what degree, but I am certainly convinced that human beings are bad for the earth in general.

If the rising temperatures do result in catastrophe for human beings, wouldn't that catastrophe result in severly reduced carbon emissions on a scale no legislator or tree-hugging activist could dare to dream about? Wouldn't that be the best possible solution?

I'm of the opinion that if climate change is a problem created by humans, and it does have severely negative consequences, then the problem and the solution have arisen simultaenously, as they often do, and we've got nothing to worry about.

If climate change is not a problem created by humans and/or does not wind up having severely negative consequences, then you've also got nothing to worry about.

You're going to be fine (read: dead) in the end either way, and it's doubtful you'll be able to affect change on a global scale within the course of your lifetime, so why not focus your energy and emotions on something you might enjoy instead?

It seems ridiculous to me that people get so worked up about this shit.

It's a waste of life.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup:

I agree, but wouldn't that extend to arguing about it on the internet?

You have almost as much chance of personally influencing the climate as you do of influencing the opinions of these people. And of course that applies to people on both sides of the argument.

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,

The courage to change the things I can,

And wisdom to know the difference. - Some guy that drank too much
Click to expand...

Successful Internet marketers are in a good position when it comes to climate change, and I'm not talking about using IM skills to inform or berate the rest of the world, that would be a waste of life as you say. I'm talking about being in an excellent place to adapt to whatever comes (or doesn't come).

Having a job you can't be sacked from and is not tied to a particular geographic location will be a tremendous advantage in a (possible but by no means inevitable) scenario where there is mass social upheaval and competition for dwindling resources.

Each of us is only 1 person in 7 billion, our ability to influence our collective human destiny is infinitesimal. Our potential to influence our own individual destiny is almost limitless.

Seems like a pretty simple choice to me.
 
samgeneric said:
Apart from the spelling error you made, which I'll assume was an accident rather than an inability to spell, will you please point out where there has been an inconsistency in my ideology. That's a bit of a hefty allegation. I would hope you could back it up.
Click to expand...

You assume incorrectly.

I deliberately misspelled that, just to see if you'd seize upon it.

I thought it would be interesting to see if a guy who has complained about how "people pointing out fallacies to each other" doesn't qualify as intelligent discourse would stoop so low as to attack someone's ideas based on syntax, grammar, or spelling.

Turns out, he would.
 
The fear is with human life being sustained. Regardless of what we 'do' now or ever the planet will 'cleanse' itself and if need be evolution will start again in a new form.

Ultimately humans can't change the future of the earth.

Deal with it bros!
 
I just want to say this - FUCK SAN DIEGO.

If you're thinking about moving here, don't

Might as well live outdoors during the non-cold seasons. No adequate a/c accomodation whatsoever for anything larger than a studio.

Give me Siberia or Kansas. At least there they have climate-controlled shelters and living abodes.

Not like here.

Btw, the weather forecasters here are the worst in the world
 
OK...so did we come to a consensus yet?

nimg.php
 
This recent rant from RFK, Jr. is a classic. I do wonder if some of these guys are well intentioned but horribly misguided or just flat out fear mongering...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY5MpXSeQh0]RFK, Jr.: IPCC Report Warns of Global Instability from Climate Change - YouTube[/ame]
 
IceToEskimos said:
You assume incorrectly.

I deliberately misspelled that, just to see if you'd seize upon it.

I thought it would be interesting to see if a guy who has complained about how "people pointing out fallacies to each other" doesn't qualify as intelligent discourse would stoop so low as to attack someone's ideas based on syntax, grammar, or spelling.

Turns out, he would.
Click to expand...
Oh my God you are amazingly dumb.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom